Put Justice Back In `Juvenile Justice'

July 12, 1999

When is a child not a child? When he's in trouble with the law.

That seems to be the appalling truth in Illinois, where, despite a juvenile court system aimed specifically at offering kids special protections because of their age and inexperience, the law abandons them when they may be at their most vulnerable.

It's time legislators, none of whom would be foolish enough to admit he or she doesn't think minors deserve protections not accorded adults, fixed the laws in this state to give kids--yes, even kids who are suspected of committing a crime--a fair shake. And they should begin by outlawing the unconscionable practice of allowing, perhaps even encouraging, juveniles to waive their rights to keep silent and to have a lawyer present during police questioning.

It is utterly astonishing that in the waning days of the 20th Century in the United States, kids 8 years old or even younger can be hauled into a police station, kept in virtual isolation and then asked to waive their Miranda rights, as if they had the vaguest notion of what that might mean.

The most comprehensive study on the subject, conducted by Thomas Grisso in St. Louis County Juvenile Court, concluded that kids 14 and younger don't understand what their constitutional rights are, much less the potentially devastating consequences of waiving them. And many kids age 15 to 17 who are questioned by police are significantly less able than adults to comprehend what waiving their rights means.

And once they give up their right to an attorney, children and adolescents are far less likely than adults to protect themselves from false statements or self-incrimination. Younger kids tend to want to please the adults around them, particularly authority figures like police officers, and so are more likely to say what they think their interrogators want to hear. What's more, children and adolescents are far more susceptible than adults to incentives like "just tell us what happened and you can go home."

Did police and prosecutors learn nothing from the debacle of the Ryan Harris murder case last year? Two boys, age 7 and 8, were arrested for the murder of an 11-year-old girl after being questioned by police and supposedly giving information only the murderer could have known. They were later exonerated.

But make no mistake about it, guilt or innocence is not the issue. Justice is the issue. And that can be achieved only when no minor may be questioned by police or prosecutors without a lawyer present.

Passing such a law should be a priority for the heads of the General Assembly's committees that deal with criminal law--Carl Hawkinson in the Senate and Lauren Beth Gash in the House--as well as for members of the task force on criminal justice convened by Senate Minority Leader Emil Jones.

Until that job is done, juvenile courts should make it a matter of policy not to accept statements or confessions from juveniles who were not represented by counsel during questioning. That would be a potent--and necessary--reminder that judges in the children's court, founded in Chicago a century ago, are responsible not just for adjudication, but for protection as well.